2.(LC)
Letter to a Citizen of Kentucky, an excerptExecutive Mansion, Washington,
April 4, 1864.
A. G. Hodges, Esq., Frankfort, Ky.My Dear Sir:
You ask me to put in writing the substance of what I verbally
stated the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and
Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:
I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong nothing
is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel; and yet I
have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an
unrestricted right to act officially in this judgment and feeling. It
was in the oath I took that I would to the best of my ability preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not
take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it in my view that I
might take the oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power.
I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this
oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment
on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many
times and in many ways; and I aver that, to this day I have done no
official act in mere deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on
slavery. I did understand, however, that my oath to preserve the
Constitution to the best of my ability imposed upon me the duty of
preserving, by every indispensable means, that government, that nation,
of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose
the nation, and yet preserve the Constitution?
By general law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a
limb must be amputated to save a life, but a life is never wisely given
to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might
become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the
Constitution through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I
assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that to the best
of my ability I had even tried to preserve the Constitution, if, to save
slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government,
country, and Constitution altogether.
When, early in the war, General Fremont attempted military
emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an indispensable necessity.
When, a little later, General Cameron, then Secretary of War, suggested
the arming of the blacks, I objected, because I did not yet think it an
indispensable necessity. When, still later, General Hunter attempted
military emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not yet think the
indispensable necessity had come. When, in March and May and July, 1862,
I made earnest and successive appeals to the Border States to favor
compensated emancipation, I believed the indispensable necessity for
military emancipation and arming the blacks would come, unless averted
by that measure. They declined the proposition; and I was, in my best
judgment, driven to the alternative of either surrendering the Union,
and with it the Constitution, or of laying strong hand upon the colored
element. I chose the latter. In choosing it, I hoped for greater gain
than loss; but of this I was not entirely confident…Yours truly,A. LincolnUse context to determine the meaning of the words in bold. (4 points)
Crucial requirement
Mutual agreement
Significant other
Worthwhile pastime
3.
(MC)
Letter to a Citizen of Kentucky, an excerptExecutive Mansion, Washington,
April 4, 1864.
A. G. Hodges, Esq., Frankfort, Ky.My Dear Sir:
You ask me to put in writing the substance of what I verbally
stated the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and
Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:
I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong nothing
is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel; and yet I
have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an
unrestricted right to act officially in this judgment and feeling. It
was in the oath I took that I would to the best of my ability preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not
take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it in my view that I
might take the oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power.
I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this
oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment
on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many
times and in many ways; and I aver that, to this day I have done no
official act in mere deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on
slavery. I did understand, however, that my oath to preserve the
Constitution to the best of my ability imposed upon me the duty of
preserving, by every indispensable means, that government, that nation,
of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose
the nation, and yet preserve the Constitution?
By general law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a
limb must be amputated to save a life, but a life is never wisely given
to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might
become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the
Constitution through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I
assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that to the best
of my ability I had even tried to preserve the Constitution, if, to save
slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government,
country, and Constitution altogether.
When, early in the war, General Fremont attempted military
emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an
indispensable necessity. When, a little later, General Cameron, then
Secretary of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected,
because I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity. When, still
later, General Hunter attempted military emancipation, I forbade it,
because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come. When,
in March and May and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive appeals
to the Border States to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the
indispensable necessity for military emancipation and arming the blacks
would come, unless averted by that measure. They declined the
proposition; and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the alternative
of either surrendering the Union, and with it the Constitution, or of
laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter. In
choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss; but of this I was not
entirely confident…Yours truly,A. LincolnWhen Lincoln asks if it is possible to lose the nation, and yet preserve the Constitution . . . what is he referring to? (4 points)
The certainty that abiding by the law would do nothing to stop the war
The certainty that abolishing slavery would bring the war to a peaceful end
The possibility of abiding by the law while destroying the nation through war
The possibility of abolishing slavery yet continuing to fight an unjust war
4.
(MC)
Letter to a Citizen of Kentucky, an excerptExecutive Mansion, Washington,
April 4, 1864.
A. G. Hodges, Esq., Frankfort, Ky.My Dear Sir:
You ask me to put in writing the substance of what I verbally
stated the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and
Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:
I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong nothing
is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel; and yet I
have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an
unrestricted right to act officially in this judgment and feeling. It
was in the oath I took that I would to the best of my ability preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not
take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it in my view that I
might take the oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power.
I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this
oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment
on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many
times and in many ways; and I aver that, to this day I have done no
official act in mere deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on
slavery. I did understand, however, that my oath to preserve the
Constitution to the best of my ability imposed upon me the duty of
preserving, by every indispensable means, that government, that nation,
of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose
the nation, and yet preserve the Constitution?
By general law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a
limb must be amputated to save a life, but a life is never wisely given
to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might
become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the
Constitution through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I
assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that to the best
of my ability I had even tried to preserve the Constitution, if, to save
slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government,
country, and Constitution altogether.
When, early in the war, General Fremont attempted military
emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an
indispensable necessity. When, a little later, General Cameron, then
Secretary of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected,
because I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity. When, still
later, General Hunter attempted military emancipation, I forbade it,
because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come. When,
in March and May and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive appeals
to the Border States to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the
indispensable necessity for military emancipation and arming the blacks
would come, unless averted by that measure. They declined the
proposition; and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the alternative
of either surrendering the Union, and with it the Constitution, or of
laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter. In
choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss; but of this I was not
entirely confident…Yours truly,A. LincolnWhat does Lincoln mean by laying strong hand upon the colored element? (4 points)
Freeing black soldiers
Giving arms to black soldiers
Incarcerating former slaves
Incarcerating slaveholders
5.
(MC)
Letter to a Citizen of Kentucky, an excerptExecutive Mansion, Washington,
April 4, 1864.
A. G. Hodges, Esq., Frankfort, Ky.My Dear Sir:
You ask me to put in writing the substance of what I verbally
stated the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and
Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:
I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong nothing
is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel; and yet I
have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an
unrestricted right to act officially in this judgment and feeling. It
was in the oath I took that I would to the best of my ability preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not
take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it in my view that I
might take the oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power.
I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this
oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment
on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many
times and in many ways; and I aver that, to this day I have done no
official act in mere deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on
slavery. I did understand, however, that my oath to preserve the
Constitution to the best of my ability imposed upon me the duty of
preserving, by every indispensable means, that government, that nation,
of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose
the nation, and yet preserve the Constitution?
By general law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a
limb must be amputated to save a life, but a life is never wisely given
to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might
become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the
Constitution through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I
assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that to the best
of my ability I had even tried to preserve the Constitution, if, to save
slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government,
country, and Constitution altogether.
When, early in the war, General Fremont attempted military
emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an
indispensable necessity. When, a little later, General Cameron, then
Secretary of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected,
because I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity. When, still
later, General Hunter attempted military emancipation, I forbade it,
because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come. When,
in March and May and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive appeals
to the Border States to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the
indispensable necessity for military emancipation and arming the blacks
would come, unless averted by that measure. They declined the
proposition; and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the alternative
of either surrendering the Union, and with it the Constitution, or of
laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter. In
choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss; but of this I was not
entirely confident…Yours truly,A. LincolnBased on the letter, what was Lincoln’s position on the Constitution? (4 points)
It was more important than his own beliefs.
It was secondary to states’ rights.
It could only work as long as there was unity.
It would only have power if the president was neutral.
6.
(LC)
Letter to a Citizen of Kentucky, an excerptExecutive Mansion, Washington,
April 4, 1864.
A. G. Hodges, Esq., Frankfort, Ky.My Dear Sir:
You ask me to put in writing the substance of what I verbally
stated the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and
Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:
I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong nothing
is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel; and yet I
have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an
unrestricted right to act officially in this judgment and feeling. It
was in the oath I took that I would to the best of my ability preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not
take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it in my view that I
might take the oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power.
I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this
oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment
on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many
times and in many ways; and I aver that, to this day I have done no
official act in mere deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on
slavery. I did understand, however, that my oath to preserve the
Constitution to the best of my ability imposed upon me the duty of
preserving, by every indispensable means, that government, that nation,
of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose
the nation, and yet preserve the Constitution?
By general law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a
limb must be amputated to save a life, but a life is never wisely given
to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might
become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the
Constitution through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I
assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that to the best
of my ability I had even tried to preserve the Constitution, if, to save
slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government,
country, and Constitution altogether.
When, early in the war, General Fremont attempted military
emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an
indispensable necessity. When, a little later, General Cameron, then
Secretary of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected,
because I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity. When, still
later, General Hunter attempted military emancipation, I forbade it,
because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come. When,
in March and May and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive appeals
to the Border States to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the
indispensable necessity for military emancipation and arming the blacks
would come, unless averted by that measure. They declined the
proposition; and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the alternative
of either surrendering the Union, and with it the Constitution, or of
laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter. In
choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss; but of this I was not
entirely confident…Yours truly,A. LincolnReview the sentences in bold. What does President Lincoln express he did not want to do? (4 points)
Give up the Union
Assist the North
Work with others
Discuss his decisions
7.
(LC)
Letter to a Citizen of Kentucky, an excerptExecutive Mansion, Washington,
April 4, 1864.
A. G. Hodges, Esq., Frankfort, Ky.My Dear Sir:
You ask me to put in writing the substance of what I verbally
stated the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and
Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:
I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong nothing
is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel; and yet I
have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an
unrestricted right to act officially in this judgment and feeling. It
was in the oath I took that I would to the best of my ability preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not
take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it in my view that I
might take the oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power.
I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this
oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment
on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many
times and in many ways; and I aver that, to this day I have done no
official act in mere deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on
slavery. I did understand, however, that my oath to preserve the
Constitution to the best of my ability imposed upon me the duty of
preserving, by every indispensable means, that government, that nation,
of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose
the nation, and yet preserve the Constitution?
By general law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a
limb must be amputated to save a life, but a life is never wisely given
to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might
become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the
Constitution through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I
assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that to the best
of my ability I had even tried to preserve the Constitution, if, to save
slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government,
country, and Constitution altogether.
When, early in the war, General Fremont attempted
military emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an
indispensable necessity. When, a little later, General Cameron, then
Secretary of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected,
because I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity. When, still
later, General Hunter attempted military emancipation, I forbade it,
because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come.
When, in March and May and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive
appeals to the Border States to favor compensated emancipation, I
believed the indispensable necessity for military emancipation and
arming the blacks would come, unless averted by that measure. They
declined the proposition; and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the
alternative of either surrendering the Union, and with it the
Constitution, or of laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose
the latter. In choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss; but of
this I was not entirely confident…Yours truly,A. LincolnWhat does President Lincoln describe in the lines in bold? (4 points)
The readers who will likely disagree with his values
The people who rejected his offer of emancipation
The times he did not allow military emancipation
The lines in the Constitution that give him power
8.
(LC)
Letter to a Citizen of Kentucky, an excerptExecutive Mansion, Washington,
April 4, 1864.
A. G. Hodges, Esq., Frankfort, Ky.My Dear Sir:
You ask me to put in writing the substance of what I verbally
stated the other day, in your presence, to Governor Bramlette and
Senator Dixon. It was about as follows:
I am naturally anti-slavery. If slavery is not wrong
nothing is wrong. I cannot remember when I did not so think and feel;
and yet I have never understood that the Presidency conferred upon me an
unrestricted right to act officially in this judgment and feeling. It
was in the oath I took that I would to the best of my ability preserve,
protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. I could not
take the office without taking the oath. Nor was it in my view that I
might take the oath to get power, and break the oath in using the power.
I understood, too, that in ordinary civil administration this
oath even forbade me to practically indulge my primary abstract judgment
on the moral question of slavery. I had publicly declared this many
times and in many ways; and I aver that, to this day I have done no
official act in mere deference to my abstract judgment and feeling on
slavery. I did understand, however, that my oath to preserve the
Constitution to the best of my ability imposed upon me the duty of
preserving, by every indispensable means, that government, that nation,
of which that Constitution was the organic law. Was it possible to lose
the nation, and yet preserve the Constitution?
By general law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a
limb must be amputated to save a life, but a life is never wisely given
to save a limb. I felt that measures, otherwise unconstitutional, might
become lawful by becoming indispensable to the preservation of the
Constitution through the preservation of the nation. Right or wrong, I
assumed this ground, and now avow it. I could not feel that to the best
of my ability I had even tried to preserve the Constitution, if, to save
slavery, or any minor matter, I should permit the wreck of government,
country, and Constitution altogether.
When, early in the war, General Fremont attempted military
emancipation, I forbade it, because I did not then think it an
indispensable necessity. When, a little later, General Cameron, then
Secretary of War, suggested the arming of the blacks, I objected,
because I did not yet think it an indispensable necessity. When, still
later, General Hunter attempted military emancipation, I forbade it,
because I did not yet think the indispensable necessity had come. When,
in March and May and July, 1862, I made earnest and successive appeals
to the Border States to favor compensated emancipation, I believed the
indispensable necessity for military emancipation and arming the blacks
would come, unless averted by that measure. They declined the
proposition; and I was, in my best judgment, driven to the alternative
of either surrendering the Union, and with it the Constitution, or of
laying strong hand upon the colored element. I chose the latter. In
choosing it, I hoped for greater gain than loss; but of this I was not
entirely confident…Yours truly,A. LincolnIn a paragraph of three to five sentences, summarize President Lincoln’s meaning in the paragraph in bold. Use proper spelling and grammar. (5 points)
9.
(LC)
The Emancipation Proclamation, excerptBY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. A PROCLAMATION.I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States of America, and
Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy thereof, do hereby proclaim and
declare that hereafter, as heretofore, the war will be prosecuted for
the object of practically restoring the constitutional relation between
the United States, and each of the States, and the people thereof, in
which States that relation is, or may be, suspended or disturbed.That on the first day of January in the year of our Lord, one
thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves
within any State, or designated part of a State, the people whereof
shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall be then,
thenceforward, and forever free; and the executive government of the
United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will
recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act
or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may
make for their actual freedom.That the executive will, on the first day of January aforesaid, by
proclamation, designate the States, and part of States, if any, in which
the people thereof respectively, shall then be in rebellion against the
United States; and the fact that any State, or the people thereof
shall, on that day be, in good faith represented in the Congress of the
United States, by members chosen thereto, at elections wherein a
majority of the qualified voters of such State shall have participated,
shall, in the absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed conclusive evidence that such State and the people thereof, are not then in rebellion against the United States.Use context to determine the meaning of the word in bold. (4 points)
Confusing
Expensive
Confirmed
Extravagant
10.
(MC)
The Emancipation Proclamation, excerptBY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. A PROCLAMATION.I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States of America, and
Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy thereof, do hereby proclaim and
declare that hereafter, as heretofore, the war will be prosecuted for
the object of practically restoring the constitutional relation between
the United States, and each of the States, and the people thereof, in
which States that relation is, or may be, suspended or disturbed.That it is my purpose, upon the next meeting of Congress to again
recommend the adoption of a practical measure tendering pecuniary aid to
the free acceptance or rejection of all slave States, so called, the
people whereof may not then be in rebellion against the United States
and which States may then have voluntarily adopted, or thereafter may
voluntarily adopt, immediate or gradual abolishment of slavery within
their respective limits; and that the effort to colonize persons of
African descent, with their consent, upon this continent, or elsewhere,
with the previously obtained consent of the Governments existing there,
will be continued.That on the first day of January in the year of our Lord, one
thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves
within any State, or designated part of a State, the people whereof
shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall be then,
thenceforward, and forever free; and the executive government of the
United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will
recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act
or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may
make for their actual freedom.That the executive will, on the first day of January aforesaid, by
proclamation, designate the States, and part of States, if any, in which
the people thereof respectively, shall then be in rebellion against the
United States; and the fact that any State, or the people thereof
shall, on that day be, in good faith represented in the Congress of the
United States, by members chosen thereto, at elections wherein a
majority of the qualified voters of such State shall have participated,
shall, in the absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed
conclusive evidence that such State and the people thereof, are not then
in rebellion against the United States.That attention is hereby called to an Act of Congress entitled “An
Act to make an additional Article of War” approved March 13, 1862, and
which act is in the words and figure following:”Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That hereafter the
following shall be promulgated as an additional article of war for the
government of the army of the United States, and shall be obeyed and
observed as such:Article —. All officers or persons in the military or naval service
of the United States are prohibited from employing any of the forces
under their respective commands for the purpose of returning fugitives
from service or labor, who may have escaped from any persons to whom
such service or labor is claimed to be due, and any officer who shall be
found guilty by a court-martial of violating this article shall be
dismissed from the service.SEC. 2. And be it further enacted, That this act shall take effect from and after its passage.”What is the effect of the following passage on the U.S. government?”…and the executive government of the United States, including
the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain
the freedom of such persons, and will do no act or acts to repress such
persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual
freedom.” (4 points)
It intends to conscript former slaves into the military.
It intends to prosecute former slave owners.
It will not stop any slave from moving toward freedom.
It will use its military and naval authority to stop the war.
11.
(MC)
The Emancipation Proclamation, excerptBY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. A PROCLAMATION.I, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, President of the United States of America, and
Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy thereof, do hereby proclaim and
declare that hereafter, as heretofore, the war will be prosecuted for
the object of practically restoring the constitutional relation between
the United States, and each of the States, and the people thereof, in
which States that relation is, or may be, suspended or disturbed.That it is my purpose, upon the next meeting of Congress to again
recommend the adoption of a practical measure tendering pecuniary aid to
the free acceptance or rejection of all slave States, so called, the
people whereof may not then be in rebellion against the United States
and which States may then have voluntarily adopted, or thereafter may
voluntarily adopt, immediate or gradual abolishment of slavery within
their respective limits; and that the effort to colonize persons of
African descent, with their consent, upon this continent, or elsewhere,
with the previously obtained consent of the Governments existing there,
will be continued.That on the first day of January in the year of our Lord, one
thousand eight hundred and sixty-three, all persons held as slaves
within any State, or designated part of a State, the people whereof
shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall be then,
thenceforward, and forever free; and the executive government of the
United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will
recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons, and will do no act
or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may
make for their actual freedom.That the executive will, on the first day of January aforesaid, by
proclamation, designate the States, and part of States, if any, in which
the people thereof respectively, shall then be in rebellion against the
United States; and the fact that any State, or the people thereof
shall, on that day be, in good faith represented in the Congress of the
United States, by members chosen thereto, at elections wherein a
majority of the qualified voters of such State shall have participated,
shall, in the absence of strong countervailing testimony, be deemed
conclusive evidence that such State and the people thereof, are not then
in rebellion against the United States.That attention is hereby called to an Act of Congress entitled “An
Act to make an additional Article of War” approved March 13, 1862, and
which act is in the words and figure following:”Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled, That hereafter the
following shall be pr
